DWRL Lesson Plans - Visualization

Course Description:

RHE 306: Rhetoric and Writing

This course is grounded in the rhetorical analysis of "controversies," broadly defined. It is divided into three units, each one requiring some sort of outside research. The first two units are devoted to rhetorical analysis; they are mostly descriptive and allow students to become familiar with what is being said and how. The third unit is devoted to advocacy; having become familiar with the controversy, students now take a position within it and produce an informed argument for that position.

Tags:

Mind map

Mapping a Controversy (Literally)

Stevenson — Fri, 24 Apr 2015 18:49:15 +0000

Author:

Katharine Stevenson

Image Credit:

Wikipedia

Brief Assignment Overview:

Students create Google maps to contextualize events and locations related to their controversies.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Kairos

Visual Rhetoric

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pre-Writing

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Every student or at least every pair of students needs a computer with Internet access.

Each student needs a Gmail account that is not a utexas.edu account. (All of my students have always had them.)

You will need a computer with a projector for displaying each student's project.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Late in the Semester

Full Assignment Description:

This classroom project is absolutely necessary for my Rhetoric of Tourism course, but it would be useful in any class that involves research projects and/or readings about travel or that are based in unfamiliar settings. My students tend to talk about the locations relevant to their chosen tourism controversies as if everyone in the classroom knows where these places are. Often, even the student writing about Jakarta isn't clear on where exactly it is!

Have students work in pairs to figure out the new GoogleMaps website, but have each student complete their own map. Avoid demonstrating too many GoogleMaps features on the projector; left to their own devices, students will figure out how to use the website collaboratively.

Begin with a short introduction in which you describe the assignment and show students how to create a new GoogleMap that will save itself as they make alterations to it. (I found that this was the part of GoogleMaps that my students had the most trouble figuring out. They must be logged into a Gmail account to create a saveable map.) After describing the instructions and expectations to the class, give them at least forty-five minutes to complete the assignment. Then have each student email you a link to their map and present their work to the rest of the class.

I set aside one and a half class days for this assignment: one full day to create the map, and one half day to present the maps.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

You will want to thoroughly familiarize yourself with the new GoogleMaps before you assign this project. There were some functions that my class could not figure out on their own, like how to draw a simple line on the map.

I created a sample map for my class that I could display on the projector and that they could explore on their own browsers.

Instructions For Students:

Most of the controversies we're working on in class are concerned with unfamiliar parts of the world. While some of us have had the opportunity to travel, we probably haven't traveled to all of the same places as our classmates, and most of us haven't been to any of the key locations of some of these controversies. The goal of this assignment is to help us all visualize where current tourism-related controversies are occurring.

For this assignment, you will create a Google map. I'll demonstrate how to begin and save a map before we start. You will then add things to the map, concentrating on points that you think will be helpful to the rest of the class. If your controversy spans several different parts of the globe, include them all! You can use this as an opportunity to demonstrate distances between various locations.

Your map should:

1. Include at least five locations relevant to your controversy. These could be points at which various events occurred, or they could be part of a timeline showing a related sequence of events.

2. Include the travel routes that are part of your controversy. You can even include a travel route from Austin to demonstrate distance or time.

3. Include several photo pins that help to contextualize your controversy.

4. Use descriptive labels.

Once you've created and saved your map, you will click "share" to obtain its URL, which you can then post in the comments section of today's PbWorks page. make sure that you change your map's privacy settings to be viewable to people who have the link. You will need to present the map to the class when everyone is finished, with descriptive commentary about the content. This should be fun and interesting, especially finding photos of your relevant locations, but it should also be instructive. Try to focus on locations that need to be understood in order to shed light on your controversies.

Evaluation Suggestions:

I don't grade this assignment, but it counts as a completion grade towards a group of assignments making up 20% of the grade.When students present their maps, I am always prepared to prompt them for more information, ask them to zoom out to show more context, etc. I try to involve the whole class in a discussion about geography and the relevance of various locations to their controversies.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

I haven't had any issues with students not completing this because it isn't graded; both semesters they've enjoyed the map assignment and it's clear that the whole class learns quite a bit. In my experience, students are pretty unclear about lots of geographical locations, particularly in Eastern Europe, India, Africa, and South America.

Course Type:

Tags:

Mapping

Google Maps

Words in Motion: Kairos and Kinetic Typography

Amy Tuttle — Tue, 24 Feb 2015 21:51:24 +0000

Author:

Amy Tuttle

Image Credit:

PowerPoint Spice

Brief Assignment Overview:

Kinetic typography is an animation technique that allows writers to mix text and motion. Students will take part of a speech or a piece of dialogue and animate it, carefully considering how they might visually enforce and/or subvert the text's underlying themes.

Type of Assignment:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Assignment Length:

Single Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Invention

Style

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Microsoft PowerPoint

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

In film and live performance, the use of time allows a writer/designer to show the reader/viewer/audience precisely what s/he wishes when s/he wishes. Kinetic typography is fundamentally different from static typography on a page, and those differences are explored in this project. In order to understand and appreciate the implications of using time as an available means of persuasion, students will create a kinetic type animation using PowerPoint, to accompany a quote of their choice.

Students are to find a brief quote to animate. The quote can be selected from poetry, music, stage, or screenplay, but the best quotes are often the ones that offer a range of emotions. Students will visually represent their selected text by expressing the content with typographic elements sequenced over a span of time. Students will carefully consider relationships between the spoken word and the visible and dynamic word, attending to variables like, typeface, typesize, weight, color, texture, focus, orientation, entrance, performance, exit, sequence, speed, pacing, transition, transformation, timing, tone, emotion, feeling, atmosphere, and interpretation.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Traditionally, shorter quotes work better for beginning animators. So, instructors may choose to provide a fixed list of quotes from which students may select their text for this project.

This lesson plan would work well in tandem with lessons related to visual rhetorics in which students build visual analysis skills by examining the visual features of texts.

Instructions For Students:

Having seen the examples in class, you will complete a short piece of kinetic typography. Choose a favorite quote and animate it using Microsoft PowerPoint. You may want to start by learning how to use PowerPoint's animation features. YouTube features a number of tutorials like this one that you may find useful.

Next, pick a quote. Write it down. Begin brainstorming what you might do with it. Think of ways to visualize the content of the quote using only text and shapes. Think about how the timing and/or motion of the elements might function rhetorically, or work together with the quote's content. Questions to keep in mind as you work: How difficult will this be? Will it add much to the final product (compared to the amount of work it will take)?

Then, get to animating! Try to take the quote apart so that the kinetic typography offers us a kind of visual analysis, showing something that wasn’t immediately obvious about the quote.

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

Enthy/memes: Making Memes to Teach Logos

regina.mills — Tue, 21 Oct 2014 02:16:34 +0000

Author:

Regina Marie Mills

Image Credit:

Traquan Minor, created on imgflip.com

Brief Assignment Overview:

To pratice creating and breaking down enthymemes, I had students create memes (about anything), break down the stated and unstated premises and ultimately, come to a conclusion as to the meme's argument.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Multimedia

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

If not in a technology-based classroom, then having students bring laptops to class or having them do this at home (after modeling it and providing examples) would also work.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

I usually take about 30 minutes for this, including time for us to break down enthy/memes (ex. Hipster Little Mermaid) together. You should have gone over enthymemes in a previous lesson and reviewed them before doing the assignment. I used this assignment in a unit focusing on rhetorical analysis, allowing students to both create and break down enthy/memes. You could also just let students break down the enthy/memes. After we break down the examples, I give students suggested memes and meme-generating websites to use (memegenerator.net or imgur.com/memegen but you can google "meme generator" and find many others). Then they are given about 20 minutes to make the meme, break down its stated and unstated premises and then post it to Discussion Board or some other class forum for student and instructor feedback.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Find a few memes that you think are current enough to use as "enthy/meme" examples. You can use joke ones that are steeped more in cultural knowledge rather than direct argument (ex. All Your Base) to begin with but also be sure to use ones that are making more nuanced arguments. Create exemplars for them to view which show what kind of structure you want them to use when breaking down their enthymeme. Have these available on a class website or other source. Be sure to scout out some meme generator sites and give them to students so that they don't waste time trying to pick one out.

Instructions For Students:

Students wil break down your example "enthy/memes" as a whole group exercise, and if desired (though this would make the activity longer), in small group settings. Once they have seen a few exemplars, they will go to a meme-generator site, create their own meme and then break down the premises (stated and unstated) in their meme along with the main argument of the meme. They will then post this to an on-line class forum for feedback. I usually give students 20 minutes to do this and if some students are very creative, I encourage them to do more than one. I have also done this in pairs, in case students are afraid that they can't come up with something good enough on their own in the time given.

Evaluation Suggestions:

I often grade this as a participation grade or as a grade for homework. This should not be a major grade and can even be just an informal assessment. However, I highly suggest having students view and comment on other classmates' work and also for the instructor to leave feedback which focuses on how well they broke down the premises of the enthy/meme.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Overall, this has been a popular lesson and one that some of my colleagues have taken up in their classes as well. It's important to let students know that you aren't grading them on cleverness but rather on the ability to make and break down an argument by enthymeme. Some students feel flustered and think there isn't enough time, or get bogged down in making a "great" enthymeme, so you can choose to give more time or to give students who do not have a polished product in class a chance to turn it in by a certain time in the evening as homework as to alleviate that stress. However, students have loved the chance to be creative and that they get to play with something that they are very familiar with. I think it helps them re-think the meme as something a bit more complex. As a teacher who finds teaching logos so hard, it helped me feel more comfortable as well as it helped to make the enthymeme more tangible.

Additional Resources:

Here is another exemplar meme created by my students. As you can see, this can allow for deeper analysis of issues like race, sex, class, sexuality, disability, etc. You could even use this as an exemplar in class and break down the stated and unstated premises (and how it works to subvery them) as a class to see how memes can be thought-provoking as well.

Successful Black Man.jpg

Course Type:

Course Description:

I assigned this in a RHE 309K class, which is a class just a step above the introductory writing course. Many students who tested out of the introductory RHE 306 take this class as well as others who are required to take it by the school or major they are pursuing. This class is still focused on writing but centers around a particular topic/controversy in order to teach those skills.

Tags:

Enthymeme

Logos

Rhetorical analysis

Building Word Clouds to Generate Search Terms

Boruszak — Wed, 15 Oct 2014 18:00:04 +0000

Author:

Jeffrey Boruszak

Image Credit:

Brief Assignment Overview:

Help your students get an overview of their topic and a leg up on their research by creating word cloud visualizations of their topics.

Type of Assignment:

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

Single Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Structure and Form

Textual Analysis

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pre-Writing

Research

Writing Process

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Open Access Software

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Media Requirements:

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

This assignment is meant to help students get an overview of their chosen research topic early in the semester by using VOYANT, a suite of word visualization tools available for free online. To use Voyant, users first create a "corpus," or a body of text documents, and upload them to the Voyant website. From there, users can use a host of visualization tools to perform "distant reading" on their texts. The most commonly used tool is Cirrus, a word cloud generator that creates an image from the most commonly used words in the corpus. With Cirrus, users can see at a glance what topics are discussed in a given body of text. Voyant can also perform functions such as: grouping distinctive words in texts together, allowing users to see not just how often words are used, but which words are commonly used in conjunction with one another; displaying words in context, so that users can easily see the words that immediately precede and follow a given term; and word trending functions showing the relative frequency of words between individual documents in a corpus.

There are many possibilities for this using this tool in class, and I developed this exercise for introductory or intermediate writing students to use Voyant to being their research. The goals for this exercise are:

Give students time to use databases and practice fundamental search skills
Force students to build a bibliography of potential sources early in the semester, giving them a body of text to come back to and examine more closely
Generate keywords that will facilitate research further down the road
Find ways to develop their research topics by seeing what their intitial searches yield.

After introducing students to a few databases (Lexis Nexis will be one of the better options for this exercise), students must build a small corpus of documents that are relative to their topic (they will have to read titles or opening paragraphs to see if they are relevant or duplicate texts). After uploading them to Voyant, they will "read" their topic from a distance, answering questions that will assist them in developing their understanding of their Voyant results.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Familiarize yourself with Voyant (http://voyant-tools.org/) and its documentation (http://docs.voyant-tools.org/). The easiest way to figure out how the program works is by uploading any sort of sample corpus, and playing with the different tools to see what they do. You may also want to run through the assignment yourself to see if you have any trouble yourself (I built and uploaded a corpus in under 10 minutes to practice. Students will take longer).

Instructions For Students:

Step One: Build a Corpus

On your desktop, create a folder names "corpus".

Then choose a database and conduct a search on your topic. In order to build a usable corpus, you will want to find articles that are at least 500 words long (Lexis Nexis allows searching with word length minimums, so it will be a good place to start). You will have to vet your search results by reading both the title of the article and the first few sentences to make sure that they are relevant to your topic, and not duplicates of other articles in your corpus.

Your goal is to build a corpus of 20 documents. When you have found an article you feel would be useful, copy the text of the document and paste it into Notepad (Windows) or Microsoft Word (Mac). Save the document, giving it the name "01". Make sure you are saving the document as plain text (.txt) for the file type/format. Set the save location as the corpus folder on your desktop.

In a separate text document, copy and paste the URL of the article. This will not be used for this assignment, so you should not save it to the corpus folder. HOWEVER, you should use the compilation of URLs you are saving for further research later in the semester--at the end of this assignment you will have 20 articles you could go back to and read more closely.

Repeat this process for all 20 documents, making sure to name them "02," "03," and "04," through to "10," "11," "12," etc. When your corpus folder has the twenty .txt documents in it, you can move on to the next step.

Step Two: Upload Your Corpus

Right-click your corpus folder. Click "compress" (for mac) or "add to archive" (for windows) and create a zip file of your corpus. Then, go to the Voyant website (http://voyant-tools.org/). Click "Upload," then "Add," and the choose corpus.zip from your desktop.

Step Three: Using Voyant

The first thing you should do is find the permanent URL to your corpus. On the blue bar at the top of the page, click the save button next to the question mark. This will bring up and export menu. Select the first option (Export a URL for this tool and current data). Copy the URL and paste it into your address bar.

Your initial results will probably not look interesting. It will says that "a" "the" and "and" are the most common words in your corpus. We have to apply a "stoplist" to limit these common words from the results. At the end of your URL, add the following text:

&stopList=stop.en.taporware.txt

Reload the page, and your corpus should now visualize correctly. Spend some time exploring your corpus. In particular, examine the word cloud in the top left. Also look under the "Summary" section on the left side. Scroll down and look at the lists of distinctive words.

Step Four: Questions

Post answers to the following in a discussion forum on Canvas.

Looking at your word cloud:

What are the most common words in your articles?

Are there words you would exclude from future searches?

Are there any unique words?

Looking at "distinctive words," can you give a name to any groups of distinctive words?

In general, do you see any ways to narrow down your topic?

Step Five: Final Actions

Send yourself an email, attaching your document of URLs, and the URL for your Voyant corpus, so that you can come back to it later if necessary.

Evaluation Suggestions:

Strict evaluation is not necessary. This is meant to be a learning exercise for students. Some will get through all of their questions, while others will only have just built their corpus. Depending on the importantce of keyword/search term generation, you may extend the assignment as homework if necessary.

Additional Resources:

Here are some sample corpuses on a marijuana controversy that I have generated as examples:

Course Type:

Course Description:

This exercise was developed for RHE 306, an introductory writing course. It is widely adaptable by topic.

Marijuana: http://voyant-tools.org/?corpus=1410382682324.2790

Medical Marijuana: http://voyant-tools.org/?corpus=1410978877246.3264

Marijuana and Prison:http://voyant-tools.org/?corpus=1410385103512.2888

Marijuana and Crime: http://voyant-tools.org/?corpus=1410979831998.5390

Marijuana and Economy: http://voyant-tools.org/?corpus=1410981347420.6694

Marijuana and Children: http://voyant-tools.org/?corpus=1410982616185.1247

All Corpuses: http://voyant-tools.org/?corpus=1410985448118.6117

Annotation and Analysis with Genius.com (Formerly Rapgenius)

Emily Lederman — Tue, 30 Sep 2014 22:02:18 +0000

Author:

Emily Lederman

Image Credit:

Genius.com

Brief Assignment Overview:

This lesson plan builds on Andrew Uzendoski's lesson on teaching close reading using Rap Genius (now called Genius), focusing on teaching students the process of annotation, as well as how to articulate the building blocks of their close reading practice. Students receive feedback from the instructor on a close reading assignment in the form of annotations. They work both individually and in groups to close read and then annotate excerpts from a text using the interactive online knowledge project, Genius.com.

Type of Assignment:

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

Oxford English Dictionary (OED)

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Rhetorical Analysis

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Close Reading

Historical Context

Literary Criticism

Poetry

Structure and Form

Textual Analysis

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Annotation

Writing Process

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Software

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Required Materials:

-Computer for each students

-Projector to present

-Texts

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

Prior to the Genius lesson, I assigned students a close reading activity for homework. They had produced one-paragraph close readings from selected short lines of poetry--their first fully independent close reading work. They were asked to make an argument about the meaning and importance of the lines that included both the how and why of literary analysis. In other words, students needed to identify something they found important about word choice, structure, etc. (this was the what) and then explain how they knew this was true (finding evidence), and finally articulate why the author made this choice. (These pieces of writing were used as building blocks for full close reading--skills we had been working on in class; I had previously given them several examples of complete analytical thoughts). I then annotated their written paragraphs to identify the "hows" and "whys" or to point out the missing evidence and explanation. We went over several examples using the projector. As we discussed my comments and ways to improve their close readings, I introduced the term "annotation" and we talked about how annotating can be used to improve their reading comprehension. This mini-lesson was useful in making sure that students both understood my feedback and began to learn the skills of active reading.

At the end of this class I had students make accounts with Genius, read their introductory page, and explore the website. Genius allows students to see a public community of annotators at work and in conversation, as well as understand how the annotations can enhance meaning. I was glad that the text we were reading, Junot Diaz's Drown, was not up on the site and annotated, as I wanted my students to engage their own critical thinking skills before they read other people's criticism.

During the next class I assigned students to five small groups (4-5 students) and asked each student to login to Genius. Each group had a different short excerpt (1-2 paragraphs) from the previous night's reading to annotate. Students were asked to look up words in the OED or by using other resources (as they were often looking up Spanish and Dominican slang) and explain these, as well as provide succinct close reading paragraphs that made an argument about the meaning and importance of certain words, phrases, sentences (building on the previous assignment). They began by doing the work individually, but enjoyed seeing one another's comments appear on the page, and I encouraged them to engage in conversation as they annotated, as well as afterward.

The groups presented their annotations to the class. Each group member was required to present at least one annotation. As a class, we discussed methods for strengthening each of the close readings and I explained how these paragraphs might be incorporated into their upcoming papers on the text. Because of the genius of Genius, students were able to comment on or revise one another's annotations. They are also aware that their work exists in the public sphere and may be edited by any member.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

-Introduce the building blocks or steps of close reading over the course of several classes

-Grade a close reading assignment using annotations that identify different aspects of the student's close reading (evidence and explanation, or "hows and whys")

-Prepare several examples of this completed assignment to show to the class (ask students for permission if projecting their work)

-Prepare students for the activity in a previous class by having them join Genius, read the introductory material, and explore the website

-Upload 5-6 excerpts from the next reading assignment to Genius (feel free to contact Jeremy Dean, Education Czar and alum, for help or advice: jeremy@genius.com)

-Split the class into groups

Instructions For Students:

HW Assignment (close reading building blocks--I provide an example of each of the following steps. I also provide them with a packet on close reading that we review as a class prior to this assignment):

1. Choose 2 lines from "Howl." Follow the steps below to produce a well-supported argument about the meaning of these lines.

2. Paraphrase. First you will need to make sure that you understand all the words in these lines (use the OED). Next, state what is said and/or what happens in your own words.

3. Make a list of observations about these lines. What's important? Refer only to details from these two lines. This will be your evidence.

4. Analyze. Now you need to consider the meaning of these observations. In at least two seperate complete sentences, describe how and why two of the above observations/details contribute to the meaning of this selection.

5. Argue. Produce a one-paragraph argument about the meaning of this selection. Each of your explanatory claims must be supported by evidence from these two lines.

Genius Group Activity

-Read over my feedback on your close reading hw assignment

-Find your assigned excerpt in Drown and reread this section to familiarize yourself

-Sign-in to Genius.com and search for the excerpt

-Begin by looking up any words you do not immediately understand, using the OED or other databases

-Next, annonate these words, explaining their meaning and situating them within the passage

-To Annotate: highlight the selection and click the "annotate" button that pops up, then enter your text into the textbox. Note: if someone has already annoated this selection, you may add your own text by highlighting the selection from right to left.

-Now, begin to close read the passage, adding annotations that provide context or further explanation

-Finally, choose a phrase or sentence that you find integral to the excerpt's meaning. Using the close reading steps, produce a one paragraph annotation of this material

-Discuss your annotations as a group and prepare to report back to the rest of the class

Evaluation Suggestions:

I did not grade this assignment (except as a contributing factor to students' participation grades) but students will soon submit a short paper on the text that will showcase their active reading and close reading skills--skills that hopefully further developed through their use of Genius. We did evaluate almost every annotation as a class, considering ways to improve students' articulations.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

Students seemed excited about this assignment and were generally very positive about the results of their work. Several of them told me they loved using Genius (and most were learning about it for the first time). Next time, I think I would annotate an excerpt as an entire class (to go over process and discuss best practices) and maybe spend more time introducing the website rather than letting students explore individually, as it took a while for some students to start their annotations. I would also prefer smaller groups and more excerpts, so that each student had the opportunity to provide a substantial close reading, rather than one or two students from each group dominating the annotating!

Course Type:

Literary Studies Course

Course Description:

The banning of books continues today in the United States, speaking both to the fear of certain ideas and the power of the written word. In this course, students will read banned novels, short stories, and poems across cultural and temporal contexts, pursuing the following questions: What causes a text to be labeled “indecent” or “dangerous”? How is literature connected to political and social movements? How do these texts contribute to our understanding of what constitutes American literature?

The primary aim of this course is to help you develop and improve the critical reading, writing, and thinking skills needed for success in upper-division courses in English and other disciplines. You will also gain practice in using the Oxford English Dictionary and other online research tools and print resources that support studies in the humanities. You will learn basic information literacy skills and models for approaching literature with various historical, generic, and cultural contexts in mind.

Tags:

Advertising Agency

Cowan — Mon, 29 Sep 2014 20:13:29 +0000

Author:

Jake Cowan

Image Credit:

Imaginary Forces

Brief Assignment Overview:

Help your students realize when they're being advertised to by helping them turn the tables on the Don Drapers of the Internet.

Type of Assignment:

Homework Assignment

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Open Access Software

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

As part of their preliminary research outside of the classroom, students doing this assignment will need to participate on at least one social media platform, such as Facebook or Twitter. While the actual assignment is designed so that every student has access to a computer in the classroom (laptops would suffice), it could easily be adapted to only use pen and paper.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

From the minute we wake up to when we fall asleep — and probably while we dream — we are the objects of advertisements. Even if we have long gone without a TV, we are advertised to constantly through the social networking sites we use daily. Ads are on our Facebook pages, in our Twitter feeds, alongside our Google searches — and not only are they impossible to escape, but they seem to hauntingly follow us around like the eyes of the Mona Lisa. In the era of big data, advertising agencies know just about everything there is to know about you: Your age, your gender, your relationship status, your likes and dislikes; and increasingly websites curate your experience based on those statistics. This assignment aims to help students recognize those rhetorical structures telling them to buy buy buy by helping them flip the tables and write their own ads.

This assignment consists of two parts:

A brief homework assignment to be completed the night before. In a one-page paper, students will need to make note of various personalized ads directed at/to them on either Facebook or Twitter. Each student must catalogue at least 4 of these, with at least one screenshot included in the text itself for clarity. The should summarize, in just a few words, what product each ad is for, the visual content of the advertisement, and the overall message. They should then try to identify trends between the ads and any rhetorical strategies these miniature texts might be employing to convince you to click on them. Finally, the students should spend a paragraph reflecting on what the ads suggest about the object's specific ethos, at least in the eyes of the companies mining your data and selecting these ads. Speculatively, what might someone assume about the viewer of these ads having never met him or her before? Who do these admen think the student really is? Are they right? What did they miss and what did they hit on the head?
An in-class exercise that utilizes classroom technology to create personalized ads. At the beginning of class, students should pair up and share their one-page papers, taking a few minutes to discuss the details of the ads, what they missed, and what their partner liked (or didn't) about these particular posts. After the brief one-on-one meeting, the students should again break up, moving to computers in order to create a new ad for their partner as would appear on a Facebook or Twitter page. The new ad should be highly visual, so the students should use a site like PicMonkey or Canva to design the perfect piece of content; should there be no computers or too few, pen and paper would be sufficient. Based on their discussions, each student should decide on what product their partner would likely want to buy, how it can be presented in order to make it more enticing, and which social media site it would make most sense to appear on. Once they are finished, the students should somehow share their work with their partners, discussing what they had in mind and why they made the choices they did; the partner should likewise talk about whether or not they find this particular ad engaging — if it were on Facebook, would they click 'Like'?

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

Other than preparing for the above, which would include familiarizing oneself with sites like Canva or PicMonkey, instructors should prepare a short introductory lecture on the rhetorical principles behind advertising campaigns. Rhetorical analyzing ads can be highly instructive, since their message always boils down to the same injunction: buy this product. Of course, there are a number of strategies that ads utilize to make that argument — humor, nostalgia, subconcious familiarity (i.e., Coke making ads so that people think of their product first to quench their thirst). A short video clip like this clip from Buzzfeed might help, or show a few famous ads and discuss those with your students.

Instructions For Students:

The closer that students pay attention to the ads that show up on their social networking sites, and the more they consider what might have prompted this particular content, the more interesting this assignment will be. Did she search for anything recently that would suggest she like watching horror movies? Did he click 'Like' on anything or follow anyone new that would suggest that he likes eating at Chili's? What ads do you like, and what about them makes those ads memorable? Additionally, when it comes to creating ads, students shouldn't worry about whether or not their partner needs an item — trust me, agencies don't worry about that at all — but how to make what you're selling appear indispensable and interesting. For additional and helpful reading, students might find this recent NYTimes article on Facebook ads worthwhile.

Evaluation Suggestions:

As with most in-class assignments, I pay attention more to participation than to the success of the assignment — whether or not someone would actually be convinced to buy a product based off of one of these ads shouldn't factor in to the grading rubric. Creativity and critical insight matter more than the productive part of the assignment.

Course Type:

Course Description:

This assignment was originally designed for a class on the rhetoric of the digital divide, which included a unit on what has been called the "filter bubble."

Introducing Ideology with HSBC Advertisements

Cate Blouke — Sun, 03 Aug 2014 02:16:11 +0000

Author:

Cate Blouke

Image Credit:

HSBC advertisement

Brief Assignment Overview:

This in-class activity uses the popular HSBC ad campaign (a tryptich of the same image with different value labels) to introduce students to visual rhetoric and ideology. After discussing the ads, students create their own version.

Type of Assignment:

Class Discussion

Assignment Length:

Single Class Period

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

No Classroom Technology Required

Media Requirements:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Media Console/Projector

Required Materials:

A computer-enabled classroom will allow for the full activity, in which students create their own version of the ad campaign. This could easily be adapted to an activity without technology.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

First Day/Week

Full Assignment Description:

A relatively straightforward exercise, this in-class activity serves as a fruitful introduction to talk about commonplaces, ideology, and visual rhetoric. The ads themselves address the issue of values through their captions, such as "The more you look at the world the more you realize that people value the same things but in different ways."

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

If adapting for use wihtout technology, you might make up some handouts with three unlabeled images and ask students to come up with labels. Similarly, if you don't want to take up the full class period, you could pre-select images to provide students.

Instructions For Students:

As your reading from Picturing Texts discussed, we learn how to se the world in particular ways. As the authors argue, "we construct our realities as we learn to see."

While this has certainly been a theme throughout the course, today's exercise addresses how the way that we see/read texts tends to reflect our own values or ideology. Ho we interpret an image can sometimes say more about us than the image itself.

The international banking firm, HSBC, has an ad campaign that reflects this multi-faceted approach to people and reality.

The triptych above labels the same image with three very different value judgments, illustrating quite explicitly how the same object can retain radically different meanings depending on the viewer.

One of the goals of this course (and an essential element of visual analysis) is for you to learn to consider multiple readings of the same image. As such, and as a handy segue into our unit on advertising, for today's exercise you'll create your own version of the HSBC ads.

With a partner (or two), find an image/object that you can label with at least three different meanings - being careful to use an image that is licensed for adaptive reuse. You can find these images by either using the google advanced image search functions or the filters in a Flickr search (both of which I will demonstrate in class). We'll be talking more about Fair Use and Creative Commons as we move into our final unit, so this is good practice to get you started.

After finding an appropriate image, using either photoshop or an image editing platform of your choice, compile the three images into a tryptich and label them with your different value readings (just as in the HSBC ads).

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

My students had a great time with this exercise and came up with some nice examples. During the discussion, we also talked about design and parallellism.

Course Type:

Technology-Based Classroom (computers for each student)

Course Description:

In this course we will explore the ways in which images can be read, analyzed, constructed, and manipulated. We will interrogate how images inform our reading of historical and political events, of personal identity, of public and private spaces. We will think through issues of self-presentation: how our stylistic choices convey messages to the world around us, and how we interpret the choices of others. We will look at the spaces we frequent and consider the rhetorical effects of everything from the architecture to the furniture to lighting. In short, we will investigate how the visual (non-linguistic, non-textual) world conveys its messages.

Tags:

Using Flag Burning to Teach Icons, Symbols, and Speech Acts

Wiedner — Thu, 10 Apr 2014 19:09:40 +0000

Author:

James B. Wiedner

Image Credit:

"Plus" by Andre, "Fire" by Nick Abrams, "Equal" by Edward Boatman, and "Light Bulb" by Chris Brunskill, all from The Noun Project; (Flag Icon Is in Public Domain)

Brief Assignment Overview:

Students come to class having read read an analysis focused upon the importance of the seemingly minor distinctions between "icons" and "symbols" in the context of Texas v Johnson, the definitive Supreme Court case regarding the extent to which an American flag and/or the burning thereof is “speech,” and therefore protected by the First Amendment.

The class then explores the definitions of- and distinctions between- icons and symbols, analyzing the assigned reading’s contention that the majority and dissent opinions of the sharply divided court actually comes down to whether a flag in this context constitutes an icon or a symbol. Students then logon to classroom computers in pairs to find an example of one symbol and one icon. Students post their examples onto our Canvas discussion board with brief explanations as to why their choices do, in fact, constitute icons or symbols.

As time allows, the instructor puts the Canvas discussion page on the projector, and student postings are analyzed together as a class. The instructor assigns a brief follow-up reading.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Cultural Context

Historical Context

Performance

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Research

Synthesis

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Vergobbi, David J. "Texas v. Johnson." Free Speech on Trial: Communication Perspectives on Landmark Supreme Court Decisions. Ed. Richard A. Parker. Tuscaloosa, Ala.: University of Alabama, 2003. 281-97. Print.

Classroom with enough computers to accommodate all students at two students per computer.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

Speaking as generally as possible, this lesson plan seeks to help students think about the many different forms of rhetoric that exist aside from the written and spoken word. More specifically, the plan seeks to establish the ways in which actions, objects and images can constitute rhetoric. The definitions and uses of icons, symbols, and what the Supreme Court calls “speech acts” as rhetoric are then explored in the specific context of the definitive Supreme Court decision on the issue of flag burning, Texas v. Johnson (1989).

“Free Speech on Trial: Communication Perspectives on Landmark Supreme Court Decisions” is exactly what the title suggests. It is organized by chapters, with each chapter authored by a different attorney, judge, or legal scholar of note. Each chapter consists of a communications-based analysis of a different Supreme Court case, the vast majority of which revolve around First Amendment issues. A copy of the chapter entitled “Texas v. Johnson” from the collection is posted on Canvas several days before class, with instructions to read and make note of any questions they have while reading.

After a general class discussion on the reading, we focus our attention upon the primary contention of the article’s author. Specifically, that the conflicting opinions among the Supreme Court justices in this case came down to whether a particular justice viewed the burning flag as an icon or as a symbol, even though the justices were not aware that this is where their disagreement was founded.

The class discussion is directed in a quasi-Socratic method of instruction, with the instructor seeking to elicit contradictions among student responses to questions pertaining what it is that makes this case so nuanced and multi-layered. The instructor asks a question outright: “If a person just douses something in kerosene and lights it on fire without saying or writing a word, are they “speaking?” Again, a Socratic method is useful: asking students questions such as the above and challenging their answers with further questions and new contingencies lends itself to students rethinking their visceral responses to the original question, resulting in the class as a whole coming up with a more inclusive yet refined working definition of “speech.” We look at explicit and implicit reasoning in the Supreme Court’s analysis of the same question(s). Students are reminded that they’re allowed to disagree with the reasoning of a Supreme Court justice and that they shouldn’t be shy about challenging any of their statements and/or assumptions.

As we continue thinking about non-verbal rhetoric, the instructor directs the class to the portion of the assigned reading where the author begins elaborating upon his claim that whether the justices thought flag burning was speech or not came down to whether they treated the flag as an icon or a symbol. Given that even the Supreme Court wasn’t able to make sense of this icon/symbol distinction (or so says the article’s author), it should come as no surprise that students struggle with the nuance as well. Rhetoricians, linguists and the like disagree amongst themselves as to the precise definitions of these terms, but I tried to make the broad explanation that both icons and symbols are types of signs.

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

There is no need to read the actual Supreme Court opinion in Texas v. Johnson. The instructor should, of course, have a firm grasp of the analysis of the case that the class has been assigned to read.

I also found it very helpful to spend time refining my own understanding of icons, symbols, signs and the like. There is much grey area and a fair amount of disagreement on some aspects of these concepts.

Instructions For Students:

Before class: Read the article posted on Canvas, making note of questions they have as they arise.

During class: Following class discussion, logon to the classroom computers in pairs, and find one example of an icon, and one example of a symbol, and to post both to the Canvas discussion board, along with brief explanations of their choices.

After class: Read a short “article” (in comic form) that will be available on Canvas after class. Create a short posting as to whether this follow-up reading helped clarify the symbol/icon distinction, and the way in which it did so.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

This lesson went over better than I ever expected. Although looking at these issues in the context of a Supreme Court decision might seem uniquely befitting a Rhetoric of Law course (which is what I teach), the issues discussed are of broad interest, and students don’t have to actually read any judicial decisions.

I would recommend pulling up the Canvas discussion page on the projector, and going through a few of student postings for as long as time allows (approximately 10 minutes).

Additional Resources:

The Noun Project- An excellent site full of simple icons and symbols to peruse. The images at the top of this lesson plan are all from the Noun Project.

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course

http://nypost.com/2014/02/09/sugar-daddy-website-has-coeds-rationalizing...

Rhetorical Analysis of "Sugar Dating" Ads and Audience(s)

Wiedner — Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:59:46 +0000

Author:

James B. Wiedner

Image Credit:

Brief Assignment Overview:

Students work on argumentation techniques, rhetorical fallacies, and other concepts via reading a heavily-biased article from the New York Post discussing the relatively new but quickly growing phenomenon known as "sugar dating," which consists of web sites that pair older men (sugar daddies) who are willing to pay money for the company of young girls ("sugar babies"). The amount that any potential sugar daddy can range from several hundred to several thousand dollars.

While sugar dating sites seem to be happy to recruit young girls of all stripes, they are clearly most interested in attracting students, as evidenced in part by the fact that membership fees are waived for any potential sugar baby who registers with a .edu email address. The banner ad above is illustrative of most common underlying technique found on these sites. That is appealing to the fact that the typical undergraduate student is cash-strapped, and that being a sugar baby is an easy way to solve the problem. The titillating subject matter and the fact that half of the classroom are part of the demographic being so narrowly marketed towards caught everyone's attention from the get-go.

After they finish reading the article, displaying and bouncing through one of the sites on a projetor is great in a classroom that is equipped to do so, but it is by no means necessary.

The class is divided into two groups who assemble their respective arguments as to the propriety of selling such a product using the rhetorical appeals employed and the audience to which they are marketing (primary and otherwise); a loosely-moderated class debate/discussion ensues.

Type of Assignment:

Assignment Length:

Pedagogical Goals - Rhetoric:

Pedagogical Goals - Literature:

Pedagogical Goals - Writing:

Pedagogical Goals - Digital Literacy:

Social Media

No Classroom Technology Required

Additional Pedagogical Goals:

Increasing Classroom Participation, Building Rapport Between Students, Building Rapport Between Instructor and Individual Students, Building Rapport Between Instructor and Class as a Whole

Media Requirements:

Required Materials:

Nothing other than copies of the article distributed by the instructor at the beginning of class.

Timeline for Optimal Use:

Full Assignment Description:

The instructor distributes copies of an article taken from the web site of what is generally regarded as a reputable source for news. The class has no access to the article beforehand. The instructor asks the class if any of them are familiar with “Sugar Dating;” calling on student(s) with raised hands to explain what sugar dating generally refers to. The instructor then elaborates on the definition provided, paraphrasing points that might have been lost in the student’s explanation, adding any aspects of the concept that were not mentioned in the process. (5 minutes)

Students read the article individually. (5-10 minutes) phenomenon

The class then divides into two equally-sized groups, and discuss positive and negative aspects of the concept of sugar dating in general, along with the article’s presentation of the concept. One group is identified as the “pro” group, with the other identified as the “con.” However, the instructor does not articulate a specific question upon which they are taking sides. The two groups each work to flush out and organize what they believe to be their most salient points. (10-15 minutes)

An open discussion in a point/counterpoint format is the conducted, with the instructor keeping the discussion from straying to far afield, while casually interjecting to emphasize and elaborate upon the concepts that are relevant to rhetoric and/or law as they arise during the discussion. It is important that the instructor is as unobtrusive as possible throughout the ensuing discussing, to the extent that the collective “personality” of a particular class will allow. (30 minutes for a class meeting twice a week)

The instructor wraps up the debate and the class by highlighting some of the most important substantive points and the most effective argumentation techniques from each side of the discussion. Students are informed that there is a discussion prompt related to the day’s discussion; each student must submit one original posting, along with at least one response to another student’s original posting before the next class meeting. (5-10 minutes)

Suggestions for Instructor Preparation:

To prepare for the class, the instructor should spend time analyzing the specific article to be distributed to the class, composing a rough outline of considerations such as (1) the arguments (and counterarguments) most likely to be made by students, (2) the rhetorical concepts the instructor is most interested in covering, (3) questions that the class discussion might not touch upon.

The instructor should also do their due diligence in researching the subject in general. Visiting the actual sugar dating web sites is especially important. Students will have varying degrees of knowledge on the subject. Given the fact that these sites specifically target female college students, there is a strong likelihood that at least a couple of students will be well-versed on the subject; the instructor does not want to be learning about nuances of the sugar dating process, etc. from one of their students.

Instructions For Students:

As indicated above, instructions to be given to students are minimal (intentionally so). They're instructed to take about 10 minutes reading the article being contemporaneously distributed, with particular attention to tone, word choice, authorial bias, context, and visual rhetoric. They are then divided into two groups with opposing viewpoints, and are instructed to construct the most persuasive argument that they can, taking rough notes (to be submitted at the end of class) outlining the same.

They're reminded to consider likely arguments from the other side, and the best way to address/respond to them. Students then partake in a debate wherein the instructor guides them back on track if they are getting off-topic, overly emotional, or missing each other entirely (from a stasis theory standpoint).

At the end of the class, the students are given instructions to make a substanive blog posting responding to an instructor-provided prompt; the will seek to continue aspect(s) of the in-class discussion. Along with one original blog posting, students are instructed to post at least one response to the original posting of a classmate.

There is not any reading students are instructed to do in preparation for the class.

Notes on Reception, Execution, etc.:

The article’s author has a clear bias from the title onward, so I ask for a show of hands as to who agrees with the author’s…unflattering…representation of sugar dating and their advertisement and recruitment techniques. To my surprise, about 18 of my 22 students said that they agreed with the author. To keep the group numbers equal, I (somewhat lightheartedly) pointed out that the pinnacle of achievement for any rhetorician is to be able to effectively argue a point with which they wholly disagree. As my class is entitled “Rhetoric of Law,” I pointed out that this skill is of particular importance to attorneys, given that they take an oath to be “zealous advocates” for their clients in court, even if those clients are individuals whom they might find repugnant on a personal level. I then split the class roughly in half, based only upon where they happened to be sitting (or standing) at that moment, and then moving individual students towards one of two camps in order to arrive at numerical parity. I did not give consideration as to what side any particular student chose during our initial show of hands.

This lesson plan is well-suited for developing familiarity between students, increasing student participation, and establishing rapport between the instructor and his students- both individually and as a class. For these reasons, the lesson plan might be particularly useful at the beginning of the semester, or later on if class participation begins lagging.

Course Type:

Advanced Writing Course